Doubles
1 Henry IV explores many different sides of a few major themes. Its
primary technique for this multifaceted exploration is one of simple contrast.
The differences between Harry and Hotspur make a statement on different
perceptions of honor, just as the differences between the Boar’s Head Tavern
and the royal palace make a statement on the breadth of England’s class
differences. In utilizing contrast as a major thematic device, the play creates
a motif of doubles, in which characters, actions, and scenes are often repeated
in varied form throughout the play. For instance, Falstaff and the king act as
doubles in that both are father figures for Harry. Harry and Hotspur act as
doubles in that both are potential successors to Henry IV. Falstaff’s comical
robbery in Act II, scene ii serves as a kind of lower-class double to the
nobles’ Battle of Shrewsbury, exploring the consequences of rebellion against
the law.
British Cultures
As befits the play’s general
multiplicity of ideas, Shakespeare is preoccupied throughout much of 1 Henry
IV with the contrasts and relationships of the different cultures native to
the British Isles and united under the rule of the king. Accents, folk
traditions, and geographies are discussed and analyzed, particularly through
the use of Welsh characters such as Glyndwr and Scottish characters such as the
Douglas. Shakespeare also rehearses the various stereotypes surrounding each
character type, portraying Glyndwr as an ominous magician and the Douglas as a
hotheaded warrior.
Magic
A strong current of magic runs
throughout the play, which is primarily a result of the inclusion of the
wizardly Glyndwr. Magic has very little to do with the plot, but it is
discussed by different characters with uncommon frequency throughout the play.
As with the subject of honor, a character’s opinion about the existence of
magic tends to say more about the character than it does about the subject
itself. The pragmatic and overconfident Hotspur, for instance, expresses
contempt for belief in the black arts, repeatedly mocking Glyndwr for claiming
to have magical powers. The sensuous and narcissistic Glyndwr, by contrast,
seems to give full credence to the idea of magic and to the idea that he is a
magician—credence that says more about Glyndwr’s own propensity for self-aggrandizement
than about the reality of magic itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment